Steiner14
-
Posts
1,410 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Steiner14
-
-
Good thoughts on ammo. As long as defenses are that vulnerable how about a workaround from scenario designers: less ammo?
-
I respectfully disagree, kind sir. Crew-served weapons and some vehicles should be treated as objects, not units. The crews are the units, the ATG/jeep/halftrack/MG is their assigned equipment, and technically usable by anyone on the field (with less aplomb depending on the type of equipment).
I don't know how it was handled in other armies, but leaving a gun without disabling it was equal to court martial and death penalty in the german Wehrmacht (but depended on the capabilities of the commanding general). My grandfather was a Panzerjäger in the 3.Gebirgsdivision and left his gun and the ammo behind, because of a sudden Russian breakthrough. There was no time to detonate the ammo and destroy the gun and he could only take the gun's lock with him.
It was investigated and since he could proove with independent witnesses what happened and that there was no other possibility, the case was not put to court. If he would have not been able to proove his claims, or if he would have left a functioning gun behind, the case definately would have gone to martial court. Leaving weapons behind was not a minor thing - not under a good general and not even under the extreme conditions of the Heeresgruppe Süd in 1944.
-
Traditionally artillery has dominated battlefields and since the latter stages of WW1 it's importance has become more evident. If you de-powered artillery you would be moving away from the realism that is so treasured in this series.
But currently it's ridiculous, that three 50mm mortars can rip off any heavily entrenched defense of the heavy weapons.
If they would have been that powerful, the Germans would have not only abandoned their 50mm GL but would have copied the Überweapons instead of abandoning and using 81 mm as the smallest calibre, since they could afford to waste explosives like no other...
Or tell me, why the army with the biggest artillery, the Red Army, wasted 90% on the big calibers and guns, instead of equipping every squad with a small Über weapon? Instead of running against HMGs over and over again, why didn't they simply use a small mortar?!
The current EFFECT on defenders IMO is ridiculous. I emphasize EFFECT, because not necessarily the power is to mighty, it could also be that the defenses and the protection they offer could be to weak and the information for the player, if a threat has been knocked out is too good.
-
IMO the problem we have now is a result of interconnected problems. Maybe it's ot even a problem of arty itself?
1. The IDing of units IMO delivers too much info (gun knocked out) in the case of mortar fire. In reality you usually only knew it, after commencing a new attack. Often enough attacks were cancelled and arty or air support called in again - and a new TRY.
Right now we don't need to try. We know the condition of dug in units.
This uncertainty seems somewhat reduced when it comes to direct fire against ATGs where the tank crews could recognize, if they hit the gun directly and if it was physically destroyed.
But artillery explosions do harm soft targets, but not necessarily the gun itself. And since the crew keeps the heads down or even could relocate in a trench, the FO doesn't see that much. IMO the uncertainty should be higher.
2. Dug in units seem to have not enough protection (they are not deep enough and the trenches and holes seem to be too wide).
I think the protection of foxholes and trenches in combination with the knowledge about the status of dug-in units could be the core of the problem, not necessarily the mortars anymore.
Because what feels really correct and good in the game right now, if you have units in the open or in the woods and there comes arty. That's really, really awful. You really have them to run like in reality.
But to me there seems to be not enough difference to dug in units. To me the available foxholes or trenches are more of the flat hasty kind, but not the real ones of fully prepared defenses.
-
Bimmer,
incredible map and even more impressive screenshots.
You should post them in the screenshot thread, too.
-
One of the major attractions of CM is learning about new equipment and forces...
I wholehartedly agree.
And since Steve seems to read this thread i want to take the chance and place the wish for an empty unit-data window, that can be filled from modders with all the cool numbers we know from CMx1.
-
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
-
Am I looking at this game genre wrong?
My impression from your description is, that you are looking at it more as a shooter game. Dashing around corners and shooting the enemy is common in Hoolywood movies and action games, but has not much to do with the reality. Whenever possible soldiers try to avoid suicidal situations, because only Chuck Norris and John Rambo survive them.
If you are experiencing situations, where you are in need of Chuck Norris, you should take this as warning sign, that your tactics probably is not the best, supressive fire is missing and that there probably could be better solutions for the problem.
IMO you are also too much hanging on the display of the individual soldiers. Try to look at them more as parts of a unit. It's the unit that counts.
-
Absolutely brutal! Playing the Gela tutorial campaign i found my M5A1's to be spagetti eater terminator machines....
Just needed to say this.
Thanks for spoiling.
-
Indeed one of the substantial things that need improvement.
-
Doing a search for a piece of information before asking is basic good forum manners. Not having done one is proof of guilt. It takes next to no "technnical knowledge" or "internet skills" to search a forum.
At least one with a functioning brain!
-
OMG, what a rude reply! Is that supposed to be an answer or a smart ass remark?
Great, thanks. All I needed to know. So I'll look for the CMBN engine upgrade and get that too when it comes out.
Sorry if you find the answer rude. I had to decide if i find the question being idiotic or a trolling one, since a ten second forum-search would have answered it faster to you, than waiting for a reply.
-
If you buy Windows 8 do you expect Win 7, Win2k and Win XP to be upgraded, too?
-
In a game I was playing recently I had a platoon mounting a truck, 1 guy refused to board and ran at full speed AWOL away from the transport towards the enemy lines.
He eventually got killed 950m away from his unit.
Meanwhile, his mates and the truck refused to move, because not everyone was on board.......
Be glad that the driver didn't follow him.
-
@Steiner14 : I've been wishing/begging for them to take away the "All-knowing" unit info since CMBN came through my door. I'd far far rather just be told "Gun" or "Infantry" or "Tank".
Me too. But we must continue to hammer them with the good wishes because there is too much distraction on the yacht.
-
The transparent tree mods are a great idea to deal with this IMO very annoying problem.
I would prefer a setting, that lets the player adjust the transparency + distance BUT also allows with one single push of a button (not cycling through all options) to switch into a second view (i.e. no transparency for action playback).
-
Wishlist:
Harder spotting, especially for entrenched and camouflaged units.
Much less ID information about the enemy units.
Better protection of entrenched units (offering the scenario-designers different levels of entrenchement by varying the depth of trenches and foxholes?)
To keep the game for the broad customer friendly, and not only to attract hardcore wargamers, make the increased realism adjustable/selectable like a difficulty level.
-
Excellent test again.
Regardless, to remove this possible variable, it would probably be best to do this test using three-man scout teams, which occupy only one AS, rather than full squads.Great idea.
Poesel, do you have some more time to spend?
-
I'm having a bit of trouble grasping the rationale behind hidden objectives. Actually, that sounds almost like an oxymoron.
I find them fantastic, because it makes scenarios possible where it's up to the player to find the important tactical objectives (Auftragstaktik).
In reality is there always a flag indicating the location, the enemy is seeing as important?
-
Interesting. Glad that a movingTvT does have a 2s cycle only and not a 7s cycle. Now i can continue my games with a good feeling again.
-
BTW, ironically just this morning I saw a video of a US Gulf War M3 Bradley Scout commander who fired a TOW missile only to have it sputter and die, falling to the ground, some 10-20m out from the tube.
Nothing comes close to french technology.
-
LLF,
interesting thoughts. I'm wondering what impact it would have, if
1. camouflaged ATGs/HMGs/inf would be less easy to spot
2. heavily entrenched units would be protected (much) better
3. if infantry density could be widened (more actions spots/unit).
Maybe 1 + 2 alone would be sufficient for a more realistic outcome (but a much more difficult game against entrenched positions)?
The problem i see: how many players would welcome much more protective defensives? When it get's MUCH harder to crack them? When you need all kind of combined heavy weaponry, to achieve a small breakthrough? When you spend half your arty and still don't know, how the shape of the defenses is, until the storm attack and then you recognize the HMGs are still all intact and your units are already the third time in a crossfire?
Maybe a solution could be, if these realism factors could be made flexible and be defined with the chosen difficulty level.
-
That's really good news, if the spotting system is somehow more complex as previously feared.
Did you make a run without the spotters, too?
-
Despite wanting to quit then I had my FO call in 105mm arty on the Panzer and impatiently waited for the Shermans and an infantry company to arrive. They show up and the Sherms start to clear the battlefield of Panzers. But then... the 105mm arty starts falling right on top of my infantry company! I try to stop it but the FO had been killed by the $% Panzer so I couldn't stop the rain of death. By the time the survivors escaped the danger I'd lost 70% of my reinforcements.
Yeah, this PzIII was a tough one. My FO was the last man i had there and he had to hide on the WC until the reserves came to rescue.
Still disliking Artillery
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
I'd like to know why aren't dug in soldiers and guns placed below surface, so that only a very small part of their body remains above surface.
Since the engine can handle the placement of individual soldiers along walls and other objects very, very well, is it impossible to make them align to an invisible wall below surface, representing a trench, a pit or a formation of foxholes?